HEALTH WATCH.

Exploring the dark side of new foods

Book's author criticizes the biotechnology industry

May 19, 2004|By JoAnn Milivojevic, Special to the Tribune.

Do you know what's lurking in your food?

A recent study at Rutgers University looked at public perception and awareness of genetically modified foods--those that contain genetically modified organisms or GMOs. Only one quarter of those polled believed they had consumed foods containing genetically modified products--even though it's estimated that up to 70 percent of processed foods contain GMOs, according to the Grocery Manufacturers of America.

Think sodas, crackers, bread and almost everything that contains high-fructose corn syrup or soy. But that's not all.

If you've been thrilled to find pretty zucchini and summer squash in the dead of a Chicago winter, chances are, unless it's organic, it has been genetically modified too.

So what's the big deal? Most food gets the safety stamp of approval from the Food and Drug Administration, right?

Well, right. But not everyone believes that makes it safe to eat, and the debate continues.

Jeffrey M. Smith, in his book "Seeds of Deception" (Yes! Books, $17.95), takes critical aim at the biotechnology industry, government, food-safety regulations and the politics of food. In it Smith, a member of the genetic engineering committee of the Sierra Club and director of the Institute for Responsible Technology, highlights what he calls "significant health dangers of GM foods."

The issue draws out passionate arguments.

"Consumers have to be aware that this debate is personified by polarization," explained Kimberly Brooks, communications director for the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, an independent information source created to forward the discussion about agricultural biotechnology. "There are few even-handed voices; when people talk about unknowns and risks, it's easy to get emotional and charged up."

An imprecise science

As the title implies, "Seeds of Deception" makes no bones about its position, and Smith presents some persuasive arguments. The book opens with several chapters that explain what GMOs are and how they got into the food chain. Smith contends that gene splicing is an imprecise science and that's the problem.

"To feed the products of this infant science to the whole population is unsafe and irresponsible," Smith explained. "Perhaps at some point in the future we will understand the DNA well enough to have safe applications. Not yet."

Smith is not alone in this position. He opens his book with the story of Arpad Pusztai, a prominent researcher formerly with the Rowett Institute in Aberdeen, Scotland, who believed that the technology could work. He strongly advocated, however, that more testing be done before releasing genetically modified food to the public. Pusztai angered industry giant Monsanto and the British government, who wanted to introduce genetically modified crops into the United Kingdom in the late '90s, Smith writes. The frenzy about genetically modified corps filled the media abroad, but received scant attention in the U.S., according to Smith. Eventually Pusztai was fired.

The exposure questioning the safety of GMOs led to European Union regulations that genetically modified foods be labeled that way.

In the U.S., the Rutgers study showed that 94 percent of people polled agreed that genetically modified food should be marked and 52 percent said they would be less willing to buy a product labeled as such. But U.S. biotech giants have lobbied to keep the words "genetically modified" from appearing on products, according to published newspaper reports. For example, in 2002, several companies joined forces and spent $5 million dollars to defeat an Oregon ballet measure that would have required labeling of genetically modified foods in that state.

"Labeling is an important part of the debate but there are multiple sides to it," the Pew Initiative's Brooks said. "To label honestly, you almost have to change the entire food production system--that would be incredibly costly. You would have to ensure that every point where the food is transitioned--from the farm to trucks to processors and so on--is cleaned and isolated from other grain that might be genetically modified."

FDA stamp of approval

If genetically modified foods are unsafe, as Smith's book insists, how did the FDA approve them?

The book outlines quite a bit of intrigue on that subject but especially in the chapter "Government by the Industry and for the Industry." Smith writes, and FDA press officer Mike Herndon concurs, that the FDA's position is that genetically modified crops are as safe as their conventionally bred counterparts and therefore don't require a special label nor independent testing. The manufacturer of a genetically modified crop/food submits its own research that is then reviewed by the FDA. Smith takes the research issue to task.